With no Rondo you seriously think they can ride Pierce, Garnett, and Terry to a finals? Really?

That's not what I said. What I said was they were a good enough team last year to take the Heat to 7 games. Without Rondo, they should have a decent chance to get in the playoffs, so why throw away all your top talent and lose all that money?

Quote:

The longer you wait the less value you get out of them. Someone could still use Pierce or Garnett as decent 3rd or 4th options

Uhh...what value do you think you'll get as "decent 3rd or 4th options"? Especially considering the amount of money both Pierce and Garnett are owed?

Quote:

What happens if they can't make the playoffs and they don't get rid of those guys?

The same thing which happens if you get rid of them now, except you also lose out on a lot of money?

That's not what I said. What I said was they were a good enough team last year to take the Heat to 7 games. Without Rondo, they should have a decent chance to get in the playoffs, so why throw away all your top talent and lose all that money?

They aren't going anywhere in the playoffs even if they do make it. They can't even stay .500 with their best player and this is their chance to get rid of those contracts for expirings and draft picks to try to rebuild their core. Pierce only has the rest of this year + a player option left so he's probably the most tradeable of the 3.

Quote:

Uhh...what value do you think you'll get as "decent 3rd or 4th options"? Especially considering the amount of money both Pierce and Garnett are owed?

They all have good value. Garnett is still the anchor on that defense, he just can't go as long as he used to. Terry is a bench scorer that can play like a starter and has somewhat of a track record (2011 finals). Pierce isn't as mobile as he once was but he can still shoot it and give you 15+ a night. They can get you some combination of draft picks + expirings + young cheap players.

Quote:

The same thing which happens if you get rid of them now, except you also lose out on a lot of money?

People won't want them as badly in the offseason since they could use free agency or the draft to address their needs. Rondo likely won't be back till the ASB next year so, best case scenario, they are around the level where they're at now fighting for an 8 seed. If teams come calling Ainge for those 3 it'd be quite foolish to not try to work a deal. They tried stretching out the Big 3 for 2 years longer than what they thought would work. It's been a good run. If you want to build a team that has a chance to compete two years from now (when Rondo is fully healthy again) you gotta get rid of the old guys. This team wasn't good with Rondo. If they miss the playoffs and have to sit on Garnett's and Jet's contracts for another year while doing so the fanbase will be awfully pissed.

Not really. Which team would need them, want them and have the flexibility to sign them?

Quote:

Garnett is still the anchor on that defense, he just can't go as long as he used to. Terry is a bench scorer that can play like a starter and has somewhat of a track record (2011 finals). Pierce isn't as mobile as he once was but he can still shoot it and give you 15+ a night. They can get you some combination of draft picks + expirings + young cheap players.

That only works with teams in the playoff hunt. Which team needs, want and can afford them?

Quote:

People won't want them as badly in the offseason since they could use free agency or the draft to address their needs. Rondo likely won't be back till the ASB next year so, best case scenario, they are around the level where they're at now fighting for an 8 seed. If teams come calling Ainge for those 3 it'd be quite foolish to not try to work a deal.

Again, why would teams call for these guys? And if they do, who exactly do you see the Celtics getting in return that would be worth giving up Hall of Fame players who can put you in the playoffs?

What's the difference from missing the playoffs now to missing the playoffs two years from now? At least if you miss the playoffs now you can try to deal those vets for younger guys to build a team that's capable of making the playoffs next year or the year after.

Quote:

Not really. Which team would need them, want them and have the flexibility to sign them?

That only works with teams in the playoff hunt. Which team needs, want and can afford them?

Again, why would teams call for these guys? And if they do, who exactly do you see the Celtics getting in return that would be worth giving up Hall of Fame players who can put you in the playoffs?

Here's a few deals I was just playing around with on NBA's trade machine:
KG -> OKC
Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones, Kendrick Perkins, Toronto's 2013 First Round Pick (top 3 and 15-30 protected) -> Boston

Boston gets a guy who was in the lottery in Lamb (although he's in the d-league right now), Jones who's barely gotten anytime, Perkins who's really just to match salaries and that all important lottery pick which atm would likely be in the 8-10 range. They don't shed much of salary, but they get younger and a potential lottery pick. According to Hollingers trade machine OKC would get 6 wins better as well, so it's not like they are staying even.

Boston gets rid of two of their bad contracts, Barbosa is a throw in to add depth to Indiana although he did well for them last year off the bench. Terry helps Indiana's 29th ranked bench scoring. Pierce can play the 3 instead of Marvin Williams. Sullinger is a supposed young guy but playing behind Jefferson and Millsap he could keep getting the same amount of minutes he's currently getting. Those are improvements for both of those teams.

As for Boston they get Favors who's blocked by Jefferson and Millsap for PT and has a lot of potential. Augustin is only on a 1 year deal and a throw in. Burks is a late lottery pick himself that isn't getting much PT. Williams is simply to balance out the trade and has 2 years left. You could also pull out a late first rounder from Utah (via GS) if you needed one.

So there's two deals right away and I'm not even a GM. There's teams that could be calling and it would improve their teams.

What's the difference from missing the playoffs now to missing the playoffs two years from now? At least if you miss the playoffs now you can try to deal those vets for younger guys to build a team that's capable of making the playoffs next year or the year after.

Because there's no guarantee you're not making the playoffs in two years? Because you are as sure as you can be that you have a competitive team this year?

Quote:

Here's a few deals I was just playing around with on NBA's trade machine:
KG -> OKC
Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones, Kendrick Perkins, Toronto's 2013 First Round Pick (top 3 and 15-30 protected) -> Boston

Boston gets a guy who was in the lottery in Lamb (although he's in the d-league right now), Jones who's barely gotten anytime, Perkins who's really just to match salaries and that all important lottery pick which atm would likely be in the 8-10 range. They don't shed much of salary, but they get younger and a potential lottery pick. According to Hollingers trade machine OKC would get 6 wins better as well, so it's not like they are staying even.

I have no idea why OKC would make that trade. The Thunder are a young, uptempo team. KG is not. Not to mention the amount you're giving up to get a guy who is possibly a year away from retirement.

Boston gets rid of two of their bad contracts, Barbosa is a throw in to add depth to Indiana although he did well for them last year off the bench. Terry helps Indiana's 29th ranked bench scoring. Pierce can play the 3 instead of Marvin Williams. Sullinger is a supposed young guy but playing behind Jefferson and Millsap he could keep getting the same amount of minutes he's currently getting. Those are improvements for both of those teams.

As for Boston they get Favors who's blocked by Jefferson and Millsap for PT and has a lot of potential. Augustin is only on a 1 year deal and a throw in. Burks is a late lottery pick himself that isn't getting much PT. Williams is simply to balance out the trade and has 2 years left. You could also pull out a late first rounder from Utah (via GS) if you needed one.

So there's two deals right away and I'm not even a GM. There's teams that could be calling and it would improve their teams.

Maybe...

But I don't see the Boston Celtics trading away Paul Pierce. And I think KG has a no trade clause. I just don't think it's a good idea, nor likely.

Because there's not guarantee you're not making the playoffs in two years? Because you are as sure as you can be that you have a competitive team this year?

If you put enough pieces around Rondo within the next two years you have a chance at making the playoffs. Especially in the weak East where .500 will get you a spot.

Quote:

I have no idea why OKC would make that trade. The Thunder are a young, uptempo team. KG is not. Not to mention the amount you're giving up to get a guy who is possibly a year away from retirement.

Lamb and Jones are sitting on the bench (or in the D-League) as it is and are blocked by their cornerstones. OKC could do it to improve their D since Perkins isn't all that good and KG can still go for 25 minutes a game. Having him and Ibaka would make it tough on many teams inside of the paint. Give KG Perkins' minutes and their defense will improve (probably their offense too, for that matter).

Really the one thing they'd be losing is that draft pick, but this draft is considered somewhat light. If KG is even slightly better than Perkins their chances of going to the finals increase.

Quote:

Maybe...

But I don't see the Boston Celtics trading away Paul Pierce. And I think KG has a no trade clause. I just don't think it's a good idea, nor likely.

Why not? Loyalty? Didn't stop them from letting Allen go (although I'd guess the feeling was mutual). Didn't stop them from trading Perkins (although he hadn't nearly had the history with the C's Pierce has). The C's should be trying to help Pierce get one last chance at a ring. And I don't think KG would accept a trade to an Eastern Conference team, but someone like OKC where he can get a chance at a title it'd make sense.

There is maybe a 1% chance the Jazz would trade Derrick Favors and that is being generous. They do need to unload a big man but it is either going to be Millsap or Jefferson that gets traded. It also makes no sense for the Jazz to trade away the player with the most potential on their roster for a veteran with only a few years left. The Jazz are the 7 seed in the West and adding Paul Pierce doesn't make them a contender. No way Utah even thinks about a trade like that.

That's fine, switch Millsap for Favors and the trade still works. Plus Millsap is only 27 (soon to be 28) so he still has a few decent years left. Spend a lottery pick on a big man and on a 3 and you got your future lineup (or you could use Green there if you'd want to give the 3 some time). Someone like Alex Len from Maryland could be a potential option.

EDIT: I realize Millsap is expired after the season but I'm sure Boston would try to work out an extension with him before they made the deal. Or they could let him walk to free up space, but that'd be dumb.

First of all, I don't follow the NBA closely enough to know the true trade value of most of these guys, so I'm just going to go by what you're saying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megatron

If you put enough pieces around Rondo within the next two years you have a chance at making the playoffs.

I don't think Rondo is a leader you put pieces around. I think Rondo is a good player you put around a leader.

Furthermore, that is complete conjecture. The draft pick you are likely to get from either a Pierce or Garnett is not likely to be a high lottery pick (since the teams willing to trade for them will be playoff contender. So you have to REALLY tank the season and hope for a good lottery season.

Quote:

Lamb and Jones are sitting on the bench (or in the D-League) as it is and are blocked by their cornerstones. OKC could do it to improve their D since Perkins isn't all that good and KG can still go for 25 minutes a game. Having him and Ibaka would make it tough on many teams inside of the paint. Give KG Perkins' minutes and their defense will improve (probably their offense too, for that matter).

So...Boston is going to want to rookies who don't play and a guy they traded once who "isn't all that good" (who still has a couple years left on a contract?

Quote:

Really the one thing they'd be losing is that draft pick, but this draft is considered somewhat light. If KG is even slightly better than Perkins their chances of going to the finals increase.

So Boston is now going to take two rookies who aren't good enough to play, a guy they traded a couple of years ago and still has years left on a contract and a draft pick which isn't considered to be very good.

And for that, they are going to give away a Hall of Fame player who is a central part in their attempt to make the playoffs?

Yes, loyalty. And surely you understand the difference between Ray Allen, a guy they acquired roughly 5 years ago and Paul Pierce, a guy they drafted and has played exclusively for them. You understand the difference between a guy with injury problems and the "heart and soul" of the Celtics.

Quote:

Didn't stop them from trading Perkins (although he hadn't nearly had the history with the C's Pierce has).

Exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megatron

That's fine, switch Millsap for Favors and the trade still works. Plus Millsap is only 27 (soon to be 28) so he still has a few decent years left. Spend a lottery pick on a big man and on a 3 and you got your future lineup (or you could use Green there if you'd want to give the 3 some time). Someone like Alex Len from Maryland could be a potential option.

EDIT: I realize Millsap is expired after the season but I'm sure Boston would try to work out an extension with him before they made the deal. Or they could let him walk to free up space, but that'd be dumb.

So now the Celtics are going to trade their Hall of Fame player who is still a high caliber player (even if he's not elite) for a guy who is never going to lead your team, but will keep them average enough so you never jump back into the high lottery?

Here's what we know. The Celtics came within one game of the NBA Finals last year. Rondo getting hurt is a huge blow. Allen is gone, but he wasn't the same Ray Allen last year he was before. The Celtics are good enough to make the playoffs, and veteran teams in the playoffs are always dangerous.

It just seems silly to me to break up a team of Hall of Famers and lose out on all the money which comes from a competitive team just so you can get very little back in return.

I don't think Rondo is a leader you put pieces around. I think Rondo is a good player you put around a leader.

Rondo will never be your top scorer but he can definitely lead a team to a long run. He gets everyone involved and does everything else well.

Quote:

Furthermore, that is complete conjecture. The draft pick you are likely to get from either a Pierce or Garnett is not likely to be a high lottery pick (since the teams willing to trade for them will be playoff contender. So you have to REALLY tank the season and hope for a good lottery season.

The pick I proposed in the KG to OKC deal IS a lottery pick. It's Toronto's pick that is only Torontos if they a) are one of the top 3 picks or b) in the playoffs. A's unlikely to happen statistically speaking and they'd have to jump 3 teams and gain about 5 games for b. It's likely a pick in the 8-10 range, where you can still get a franchise changer. Just for comparison, Andre Drummond dropped to the 9 spot last year and has arguably been one of the 3 best rookies this year. There's talent there.

Quote:

So...Boston is going to want to rookies who don't play and a guy they traded once who "isn't all that good" (who still has a couple years left on a contract?

They don't play because they play the same positions as guys who are their core pieces (Durant, Martin). We don't really know their potential all that well because they aren't getting nearly enough minutes to show what they got. You can't base much off of a guy playing only 6-7 minutes a game. And again, Perkins is simply to even out the contacts. I exaggerated slightly that he isn't all that good, but he's more of a bench big man that can play defense. His offense is virtually nonexistent aside from scrap points, but he can defend well enough to get 20 minutes a game. Plus again that pick is in the lottery which would give them the opportunity to get a pick in that 8-10 and 12-14 range (with their own pick). You can clearly get starters at those spots.

Quote:

So now the Celtics are going to trade their Hall of Fame player who is still a high caliber player (even if he's not elite) for a guy who is never going to lead your team, but will keep them average enough so you never jump back into the high lottery?

You talking about Millsap? Millsap is a very good big man scorer who's really begun to play well since he became a starter 3 years ago. Last year, statistically, he was very comparable to Gasol, Nowitzki, and Aldridge, all who I'd say could be a core piece for a run.

Quote:

Here's what we know. The Celtics came within one game of the NBA Finals last year. Rondo getting hurt is a huge blow. Allen is gone, but he wasn't the same Ray Allen last year he was before. The Celtics are good enough to make the playoffs, and veteran teams in the playoffs are always dangerous.

It just seems silly to me to break up a team of Hall of Famers and lose out on all the money which comes from a competitive team just so you can get very little back in return.

Veteran teams in the playoffs are dangerous if they're good. This Boston team doesn't have the guy that can get everyone involved anymore. Pierce is about the only guy that create his own shot.

Sometimes you have to bite the bullet for the future. If they had a record of a 5 seed and Rondo went down it would be a different scenario. They were treading water with him. If Bynum comes back soon (and from reports it looks like he'll be back before the ASB) Philly could come in and take that spot from them. I'd at least try to gauge teams interest on my guys to see if I could craft a team for the future.